Re: An Interesting Interview on the F-35
« Reply #7 by BobR:
Quote from: HankB on Today at 08:12:17 AM
Will the low frequency radars localize stealth aircraft precisely enough to provide a good fire control solution or provide terminal guidance for a missile?
That's a good question, everything I found says probably not, for now. But then again, the literature usually lags real world, so at this point in time, that may be a toss up on whether or not the low frequency radars can localize to a firing solution. I did find quite a few articles on low frequency radar and stealth technology. Pretty interesting.
bob
That's what I was wondering about, but according to what I've read and seen "in the movies" on the Battle of Britain, at least it gave information on range and bearing for large metallic objects, which was
at least enough to scramble the right defensive forces in the right direction. But I don't really know enough about radar and a brief search does not yield specifics about the frequencies used except by code-letter designation and that it was probably below the 200 MHz I mentioned. So that's why I wondered about the interviewee's "stealth being a scam" remarks.
The only thing I can think of that would favor low frequencies for stealth aircraft detection is the possibility that the longer waves would penetrate the coatings, and reflect off the gross metallic objects inside the plane, like the bombs and the engine and the like. This might at least give the "range and direction" needed for a warning --as in the Battle of Britain --if not the precision information for gun-laying purposes.
BobR, please PM me some citations for "I did find quite a few articles on low frequency radar and stealth technology. Pretty interesting."
I'll lay off that aspect of the F-35's merits/faults now for lack of better understanding of the stealth technology in terms of the interviewee's remarks.
Terry